The opinion
Opinion issued June 27, 2013
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-12-00059-CR
———————————
NUUR AHMED, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 184th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1282561
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A grand jury returned a true bill of indictment against appellant, Nuur
Ahmed, for the felony offense of aggravated robbery.1 In exchange for the State’s
1
See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 29.03(a)(2) (West 2011).
agreement to reduce the charge and to dismiss another indictment pending against
him, Ahmed pleaded guilty to the lesser-included offense of aggravated assault
with a deadly weapon.2 The trial court found Ahmed guilty and sentenced him to
confinement for seventeen years. Ahmed has filed a notice of appeal. We dismiss
the appeal.
In a plea-bargained case, a defendant may only appeal those matters that
were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial or after obtaining the
trial court’s permission to appeal. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02 (West
2006); TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be dismissed if a certification
showing that the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the
record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).
Here, the clerk’s record contains one certification indicating both that this is
and is not a plea-bargain case, a second certification indicating that this is not a
plea-bargain case, and a judgment indicating that the terms of the plea bargain
were “without an agreed recommendation – State reduced from a 1st degree
felony.” The record further contains a document styled as a “waiver of
constitutional rights, agreement to stipulate, and judicial confession,” which
indicates that the State moved to reduce the charge to aggravated assault, that the
case was without an agreed recommendation on punishment from the State, and
2
See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(a)(2) (West 2011).
2
that Ahmed waived his right to appeal if the trial court accepted “the foregoing
plea bargain agreement.” The document does not, however, indicate whether the
State moved to reduce the charge in exchange for Ahmed’s guilty plea, nor does it
mention any other pending charges against Ahmed. As a result, we abated the case
for the trial court to resolve the ambiguity in the record, by determining whether
this case involves a charge-bargain agreement.
After holding a hearing on our abatement order, the trial court found that the
State moved to dismiss a second aggravated assault charge against Ahmed in
exchange for his guilty plea to the offense of aggravated assault in this case and
that Ahmed’s “plea of guilty was made in exchange for the State’s agreement to
reduce the charges against him.” The trial court then executed a certification of
appeal stating that this is a plea-bargained case and Ahmed has no right of appeal.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The record supports the trial court’s certification.3
See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Shankle v. State,
119 S.W.3d 808, 813–14 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). Because Ahmed has no right of
appeal, we must dismiss this appeal. See Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680
(Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
3
An affidavit of Ahmed’s trial counsel, offered by the State and admitted without
objection, specifically states: “Through plea bargaining, I was able to get the
charge reduced from aggravated robbery to aggravated assault” and “[a] second
charge of aggravated assault was dismissed as part of the plea agreement.”
3
Accordingly, we reinstate this case and dismiss this appeal for want of
jurisdiction. We dismiss all pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Brown, and Huddle.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
4